Historic Preservation Commission – April 7, 2022

Video Description: Historic Preservation Commission – April 7, 2022

Note: The following is the output of transcribing from a video recording. Although the transcription, which was done with software, is largely accurate, in some cases it is incomplete or inaccurate due to inaudible passages or [software] transcription errors. It is posted as an aid to understanding the proceedings at the meeting, but should not be treated as an authoritative record.

Read along below or follow along here: https://otter.ai/u/CHqwzM250RlqBP4q2J7S08qqWvY

Unknown Speaker 0:01
Okay, and we are live.

Unknown Speaker 0:04
Okay, great. Thank you, Dallas.

Unknown Speaker 0:08
Welcome, everyone to the April 7 2022. Historic Preservation Commission meeting. As you’ve noted, we are still holding this meeting remotely. We’ll have some further instructions for those in the public later on. Let’s go ahead. We’ll call the meeting to order and can we assume we have the roll please.

Unknown Speaker 0:36
Mr. Lane, here, Commissioner Hardee’s. Commissioner Hardee’s. may not be able to hear

Unknown Speaker 1:02
Mr. Hardy’s if you’re there, I’m asking you to unmute, but perhaps walked away for a moment.

Unknown Speaker 1:09
Right. Go ahead. Commissioner Norton. Here, Commissioner goon Mr. Jacoby. Here, Commissioner Sibley and Commissioner hearties.

Unknown Speaker 1:43
I guess we’ll note that Commissioner Hardee’s appears to be on his way into the portal but as a formally arrived. Right, thank you. We do have a quorum. First item on our agenda is approval of the meeting minutes from March 3 which were reasonably lengthy. Any comments or questions? Um, the meeting minutes?

Unknown Speaker 2:23
Okay, I only have one brief comment. And somewhere in here, it was noted that I was trying to get the historic preservation conference session that I attended on that demolition Ordinance of deconstruction ordinance shared at the moment, all I can do is go back in and watch it through my own login. So I’ve asked, I send a note to historic preservation, Inc, down in Denver to see if there’s a way we can share that and package it to everyone. So I think that would be useful. So that’s still in process. All right. There are no comments or corrections. So entertain a motion.

Unknown Speaker 3:12
I’ll move to accept the minutes from April from March of 2022.

Unknown Speaker 3:22
No second.

Unknown Speaker 3:24
Okay. Thank you. I have a motion to approve the minutes from Commissioner Norton. Seconded by Commissioner goon. And Miss Joseph you would call the roll. VARs.

Unknown Speaker 3:34
Chairman lane. Approved Yes. By Commissioner Hardys. Commissioner Norton. Yes. Commissioner goon. Yes. Commissioner Jacoby approved. Commissioner Sibley.

Unknown Speaker 3:59
Okay, great. Thanks. We have unanimous approval of the march 3 minutes. The package? Let’s see. So then we have a report. Let’s see. Work from the chair. So this is again, my opportunity to tell anyone out there that we will have a public invited to be heard and potentially public hearing during that time, this information will pop up on your screen. And you can call in using the number and the meeting ID. At that time, and we’ll call on you once we’re back live. Comments are limited to three minutes for these sessions. And we do ask that you state your name and address for the record prior and prior to proceeding with your comments. And remember to mute the live stream so that we don’t get

Unknown Speaker 4:58
nasty feedback. All right,

Unknown Speaker 5:01
thank you. Let’s see next is communications from staff liaison. Winter Schumacher. Do you have some information for us? Let me just note. Sorry, Brian. That’s fine. Just note that Commissioner Hardee’s has arrived.

Unknown Speaker 5:21
Now. Sorry about that my computer froze and had to do some gymnastics.

Unknown Speaker 5:26
No, no worries, welcome. We assume that we hope that you didn’t have any objections to the meeting minutes because we approved them. Nope. Sounds good to me. Too late anyway.

Unknown Speaker 5:40
All right. Well, I’ll be brief. Since most of the items that we’re planning to talk about are covered on the agenda items. There’s just one item that I was going to remind the commission of, I think I sent a kind of a list of webinars that are hosted by History Colorado, a little while, maybe last month, there’s one coming up on April 20. Note and I sent out another email just with a reminder, it’s regarding innovation loans. Again, it’s April 20th, over the lunch hour, so I encourage commissioners who are interested in that day to participate. That’s good training session for everybody on vacation. So and that’s all I have for right now. Okay, thanks, Brian. You were

Unknown Speaker 6:26
busy last month. This is a this is a the packet for today’s meeting was one of those Careful what you asked for kind of scenario. I appreciate all the work you put in. All right. Let’s see. So this now is our public invited to be heard portion of the meeting. This would be for anything that is not on the agenda. If there’s anyone out there that would like to comment to the commission. Again, for something not on the agenda, please go ahead and dial in now using the toll free number, enter the meeting ID number and press pound and then we’ll call on you based on your phone number to give you your three minutes. And so at the moment, we’ll take a five minute break while we wait to see if anyone calls in and during that time commissioners can mute and turn off their videos feeds Thanks

Unknown Speaker 11:34
chair we’re about 20 seconds out from the five minute mark currently there are no callers

Unknown Speaker 11:44
Okay, thanks.

Unknown Speaker 11:46
No problem once I see the commission returns I will confirm if we have any more callers

Unknown Speaker 12:02
All right, I do see that a caller Did you? Yes, join. So in that case if you’re ready, we can start this off.

Unknown Speaker 12:12
Okay. Let’s see commissioners you want to get back online here

Unknown Speaker 12:25
looking for Commissioner Norton

Unknown Speaker 12:35
like to wait a couple seconds here to see if Commissioner Norton gets back with us before we start with the public comment.

Unknown Speaker 13:34
Commissioner Norton, if you are there, but unable to turn on your camera or your mic, you can feel free to to maybe close out of zoom and then jump back on. Otherwise, yeah, I’m pinging to start video but think there might be something on their end. Okay.

Unknown Speaker 13:58
Okay, well, I guess we’ll move forward with the public invited to the earth portion of the meeting. And hopefully Commissioner Norton can either hear us or get back in to the meeting. So again Sure,

Unknown Speaker 14:19
yeah. In that case, I can start with our caller caller with the last three digits 414 Color 414 If you were there, please mute your live stream and hit star six to unmute your device. color with the last three digits of their phone number 414. Please hit star six to unmute. I saw you’re on mute and then go back to mute. Try one more time hitting star six Hi there. Can

Unknown Speaker 15:04
you hear us or me?

Unknown Speaker 15:06

Unknown Speaker 15:07
All righty. Do I began? I don’t see anyone on screen.

Unknown Speaker 15:14
Yes, if you would please state your name and address and then you have three minutes for comments to the commission. Welcome. And thank you.

Unknown Speaker 15:22
Okay. Thank you commission. This is Sharon Alarie 534, Emory street co chair of historic Eastside neighborhood. self preservation commission, we’re now moving into the second quarter of 2022. And where are you? And where are we headed? Where are you headed? Have you developed a work plan which you can move forward on for Longmont? Have you looked into updating the demolition code, but to make motions so that items move to the next level? As I’ve attended these meetings, the last two years, motions aren’t made. And to me when I’ve served on boards, once a Motion is made, seconded, and then there’s discussion, typically that gets it moving along. So may I suggest that as commission members that you make motions to move things forward? So it does get on a timeline? I know that right now, as we enter the second quarter of the year, we’re supposed to be getting the status on planning and creating guidelines for preservation. Where are we with that? I mean, I know it’s just the beginning of the second quarter, but the wheels of bureaucracy move very slowly. So I just want to give you a little background knowledge. As far as preservation, the historic west sides already been partially dismantled, just due to the past 30 years of their zoning being significantly different than that of the historic east side. And there are some people who live there that want to capitalize on that person zoning. And they’ve lived there for a long time, the west side has less concerns or problems for the last 30 years, because of their present zoning. They have, they do have the benefit of not living so close to the train, and they don’t have very large multifamily complexes. And they have not had a school Demolish. Like we have the Brian school demolished at Long’s peak and Emory. And there’s no east west street closures. So life and property values are good over there. Then there’s Denver, who only recently came under the present preservation umbrella, and I would guess it was for financial benefit. I’m talking about our downtown, I’m sorry, not Denver downtown, there are many owners who maybe don’t want you to tell them what to do. And then maybe other people it is their belief system and financial gain. So back to Hana, we just want what we had before you’ve changed their zoning from our LP exploitation has started, we want to remain historically sensitive neighborhood was livable space. And if someone wants to Aug, then it must follow the historic sensitive guidelines. We do not want to get our protects we if we do not get our protections back, we will be exploited with AD use, because there’s space for it. And most likely, they won’t be affordable by the time they’re built out. So what I’m asking is, we’ve been good guardians, and we’d like to continue and one side of guidelines is not going to be good for all. So as the historic preservation commission, please make some motions, move things forward, ask questions, and then demolish the demolition code. I just want to say 830 Was demolish because it said it couldn’t support a second story. I think that was an error on Jade’s part, something that maybe you might want to investigate to see if I’m off base, or if Jade was off base. So please hurry up. Thank you. I appreciate your time and dedication.

Unknown Speaker 19:19
For comments.

Unknown Speaker 19:22
All right. That was the only color we had was that correct? That is correct. Okay, we’ll go ahead and close the public invited to be heard portion of our hearing, and move on to the next item, which is prior business. Before we get into it, I just want to double check. This is an action requested item. So do we have a public hearing portion of this

Unknown Speaker 19:49
item? Sorry, commissioners

Unknown Speaker 19:53
took me a little while to get unmuted. No we do not. This is not a formal hearing. I Um, that requires a public hearing. It’s basically a recommendation from the Commission on the condition of approval that was approved by both planning Zoning Commission and city council.

Unknown Speaker 20:14
Okay, great, thanks. I just wanted to make sure that I didn’t miss something because sometimes I get a little eager to move things along. And sure if that portion, which is bad, so All right. Well, Brian, you want to give us just a quick overview, and I think we’re all familiar with this. But in terms of what we’re what we’re here again, to talk about.

Unknown Speaker 20:34
Sure. And we have several guests, and I think they were introduced as kind of the beginning of the meeting before we started the recording, but there’s representatives from the property ownership group United properties. Jamie Pollack and Mona Belliard are here this evening. I think somebody perhaps from Dimension group was going to join us I’m not sure if they’re able, are on the call or not. They’re part of the design group for the project. And included in your packet was some background information regarding stations that the Commission had on this topic. I believe you discussed this, with Jade and the applicants. Least on a couple of instances, I think it started actually 2020 and continue to a couple of meetings at 2021 as well. And it culminated, I believe in a recommendation from the Commission in September 21. And I think in the packet, there’s copies of those meeting minutes regarding that particular discussion. And at the time, the Commission had recommended that the project, the 711 proposal for the commercial center not move forward because of the significance of the property under the four criteria making it eligible on the National Register. So the Commission’s recommendation was forwarded on to the planning Zoning Commission, when they held their public hearing on the rezoning and the overall development plan for the proposal. And as part of that hearing, as noted in the in the communication, the the plan, Zoning Commission included a condition of approval, to develop a plan for preservation of the site’s history through incorporation of appropriate references to be included with the development of the site. And so that was to be implemented in coordinates with HPC. And that’s why we’re here this evening, as well as city staff. The Commission’s recommendation was forwarded on to city council as part of their deliberation on the item this past winter. I mean, I think it happened in January and February, when the hearings were heard with city council. And I just will also note that the historic preservation Commission’s recommendation was also included in the information that was forwarded on to city council as well. So they were aware of the recommendation that was made by not only planning Zoning Commission, but also the historic preservation commission. And the the city council did approve, in February, the rezoning and the overall development plan to allow the 711 lane commercial center to move forward with the with the condition that was brought forth by the plan Zoning Commission regarding developing a plan, as noted in the communication. And so we’re here this evening, just to kind of talk about that I know there’s like I said, there’s representative from the ownership here to respond to any questions that commission might have, as noted, and Dallas, if you wouldn’t mind maybe putting up those, those slides that were in the packet that might be helpful just for reference.

Unknown Speaker 24:07
Sure thing, give me just a moment. Thank you very much.

Unknown Speaker 24:13
And then in terms of those who are here, representing the owners, do you have anything you’d like to present or talk about

Unknown Speaker 24:24
to the commission?

Unknown Speaker 24:27
Do you want to walk us through some ideas or we’re certainly welcome.

Unknown Speaker 24:34
Yeah, hi, this is Jamie Pollack with United properties where the developer on this project, I know that our architect was actually I’m sorry, I’m starting my video. Sorry, Dallas. Our architect was supposed to be on to answer a little bit more. But yeah, so I think over time, we’ve kind of played around with some different stuff. We’ve done some structural have integrity studies on the buildings in the barns and whatnot. And those did not come back very favorable. We also were worried about some of the riffraff that those structures were bringing to the property and whatnot, but very respectful to the history and want to do something here. And I think we kind of came up with a few different ideas here to throw out to you guys in regards to, you know, how we could maybe show you know, the history there and is there think is the next slide showing one of them? So this is just the project where the project lays there on 1/19 and Slayton. And then if you could keep going to the next slide.

Unknown Speaker 25:57
And if I could maybe just sorry, David for update. If I could just interject, I know that. There’s a note on here about the floodplain. There is a local floodplain. It’s not a FEMA recognized floodplain. So you know, in terms of the process, there’d still be a process in terms of reviewing any modification to the barn. But it wouldn’t have necessarily have to go through finos. FEMA, so I just wanted to clarify that because I talked to our floodplain administrator today about that.

Unknown Speaker 26:34
Thanks, Brian. So that yeah, so he, I guess, Brian hit on the floodplain. Can you the next slide, please? See here. Again, I think this slide here is just showing those existing buildings and the condition of those buildings as we walk through them. And, again, a little bit, you know, our concerns with the structural integrity there, I think it was a whole lot of money to restore those buildings.

Unknown Speaker 27:06
I think if we keep going, we can get to the slides that show what we were proposing for.

Unknown Speaker 27:15
I think this is the start.

Unknown Speaker 27:17
Start of it. Okay. All right. So I think one of the ideas here was to do some kind of concrete patches to show where where the buildings were. There was just a different architectural idea from our architect, to kind of, you know, within the paving show where those buildings were

Unknown Speaker 27:45
to basically make it like a different color.

Unknown Speaker 27:51
Yeah, so in the in the, I think the proposals, I’ve read it in the area where there’s pavement, there’s a different contrasting material, perhaps, or color to find the location of the structures that are being removed in those particular locations. And then for the other buildings that are kind of outside of the construction footprint, such as the barn and a couple of the other outbuildings that I think the proposal was to do a maybe a couple foot tall, kind of concrete foundation to show where the buildings resided. Correct.

Unknown Speaker 28:37
I think I can move to the next slide there. So this shows that a little bit different for for everybody there just some ideas on how that that would show.

Unknown Speaker 28:49
Okay. See, Commissioner Norton’s got her hand raised? Did you have a question about that? Specifically, you want to?

Unknown Speaker 28:56
Yeah, I have several questions about this. Um, first of all, this particular I want to make sure about about the concrete. Okay, specifically, I’m sure I’ll have questions about all of the proposals. Um, I think you know, one of my first questions is really about how so thinking about how a convenience store like this, what kind of traffic and how people use it, you know, how would people be directed out to the concrete pad structures that are outside of that parking area? What is the plan for long term maintenance of that like, what does that look like with the longevity of the concrete? And then this site one of the criteria under which it is eligible is D, which is an archeological criteria because of the data potential. How are you going to avoid and or take into consideration the archaeological assemblages, if you’re adding structures, essentially, and doing subsurface disturbance out in these areas.

Unknown Speaker 30:16
Again, my, my architect is not hear

Unknown Speaker 30:22
well, on some of this, though, like, as far as I know, the structures that are out in the grass area, I’m sorry, I’ll start my video. There we go. My good. Ah, um, so as far as the structures in the grass area, um, we weren’t looking to have people come out to those structures, we would actually prefer that that not be the case.

Unknown Speaker 30:57
Then what is the utility? And how are we educating the public about the history of the site through these structures?

Unknown Speaker 31:05
Um, well, I’m one of our future slides, we were proposing to do more of an information panel on the trail that’s going to be in that Greenway trail. Um, so we were proposing that with information. And we had also talked with Brian about even putting some kind of, you know, if some kind of monument or something that offered some information we’ve talked, I think, as far as information giving, the public, it goes into probably more on the rest of our presentation here. But our architect was also like, doing something on the screens inside the store on the monitors, the TV monitors that give info. So we were just kind of looking for your guys’s ideas and suggestions on that. We were just throwing out a variety of

Unknown Speaker 32:09
ideas. So I’m asking specifically on this idea, just a number one for installing custom concrete outlines depicting the existing foundation locations. What is the utility if we don’t intend having the public actually see and visit those?

Unknown Speaker 32:28
Show where the barn was?

Unknown Speaker 32:31
But if you don’t want the public out there, how are they going to see where the barn was?

Unknown Speaker 32:35
Well, it would be a raised surface so that they could see it from the paved area.

Unknown Speaker 32:43
It might be helpful to let you guys run through the rest of the ideas, and then maybe we continue the discussion.

Unknown Speaker 32:53
Yeah. And I think, again, this is an open discussion. You know, we want the input from you guys, we just came up with alternatives, we wanted you to know, that we were thinking about it, and we’re open to suggestions from from there. So next, next slide. So we did we discussed, you know, putting them your mural on the building, something that we have done in some other locations of ours, around in different cities and whatnot. And so we had just kind of, it’s something that would be painted, more or less on the side of the building there. And we just put those pictures below like, you know, Mace basically showing the representation of the barns and whatnot. So that was just a different, different idea. Next one, and I think right there is kind of showing the location we were thinking about that mural on the side of the building there, so the the West Elevation facing west there. So everybody who’s coming in and turning into the project would be able to see it on the building.

Unknown Speaker 34:23
Next slide.

Unknown Speaker 34:29
So this is what Mona was talking about a little bit there about the TVs that would could be mounted within in the store that you know, basically would be more or less a rotating video of different pictures and if people are visiting the store, they would see the historic meaning of the site there. Just so just a different idea of things that have been done in the past. Is that click on the right there the videos or does that take you somewhere

Unknown Speaker 35:15
it looks like it I can mess around with it but I didn’t realize there was a video attached so if it is something that needs downloaded that’ll take a second

Unknown Speaker 35:24
Mona is there a video on there?

Unknown Speaker 35:26
Um, I don’t know that I don’t know.

Unknown Speaker 35:33
Yeah, there’s a video link embedded in there Dallas I don’t know if you can have access to that or it’s a couple minute video and I don’t know if any of the other the commissioners were able to access that online I also

Unknown Speaker 35:49
wouldn’t work so yeah,

Unknown Speaker 35:51
I yeah, there’s a link that I’m sorry there’s a I do not have permission to open the video link.

Unknown Speaker 35:59
If the commission is interested in seeing it I have it on my screen if I could share perhaps share my screen if there’s any interest in seeing that

Unknown Speaker 36:12
yeah, let’s do that if we can.

Unknown Speaker 36:14
Dallas is okay if I share my screen go ahead yeah

Unknown Speaker 36:21
sue me I get the right one

Unknown Speaker 36:29
can you see a blank screen on that?

Unknown Speaker 36:31
Yeah, yep.

Unknown Speaker 36:34
All right, let me see if this works

Unknown Speaker 36:48
Brian, if there’s audio attached to it, we’re hearing it through your speakers and not through the actual video

Unknown Speaker 36:59
so I pause it Dallas I don’t know how they’re connected to the audio. Okay.

Unknown Speaker 37:05
If you close it real quick the next time you offer to share your screen It should allow you to it’ll there’ll be a button at the bottom this is optimized for audio and video

Unknown Speaker 37:16
All it is is music anyways I don’t know if that makes a difference

Unknown Speaker 37:20
I don’t know if the music’s that important

Unknown Speaker 37:23

Unknown Speaker 37:25
so I’ll try this again restart this restart from where I left off.

Unknown Speaker 39:43
All right, I think that’s it.

Unknown Speaker 39:50
Yeah, and I think that was, you know, just an idea of different things we could put up on those monitors to show the history and what exists There’s one point. So, again, just throwing out ideas and thoughts.

Unknown Speaker 40:05
And Dallas Yeah. Okay, thank you, you get to put the slides back up. Thank you. Maybe continue on by the

Unknown Speaker 40:18
so we did we Mona had mentioned, we talked about the reader board along the Greenway there. There’s there’s also the idea of putting another reader, one on that Greenway and also a reader on the backside of the development there. You know, maybe there’s a little paved area that you could put it on with a bench or something that people could come in and look and see that the reader in the history of the site there

Unknown Speaker 40:54
I think as notes on the side there, but we, we are making a contribution through the development of 140,000 towards the Greenway improvements. So I think that would be part of that.

Unknown Speaker 41:14
Next slide.

Unknown Speaker 41:22
So again, that’s showing that reader board in the backside of the property there where we could do a little, you know, a landscaped area that people could visit to see the history of it.

Unknown Speaker 41:41
Next slide. Leave that is all I’ve

Unknown Speaker 41:50
got. Might have been Yeah.

Unknown Speaker 41:55
Okay, thanks. I guess I have one quick question for you. In your mind. Is this something where you may be willing to do more than one of these? Or is this an either or, kind of scenario from your perspective? What’s what’s your approach here?

Unknown Speaker 42:11
Yeah, I think we’re kind of just open to feedback here. And what do you guys are looking for? Yeah, we’re open to discussion. Obviously, financial impact. Effects affects the feasibility of the project, but I don’t think we’re talking about anything real crazy here. So Okay.

Unknown Speaker 42:36
Other commissioners have questions or comments you’d like to put out there. Commissioner Jacoby?

Unknown Speaker 42:49
There you go, can you can hear me. I liked the idea of the mural. TV monitor, maybe showing videos would maybe be nice as well. But I don’t think we have to show collapsed buildings, I think you can show a lot more of the agrarian side of what some of what it looks like before. I’m little, I’d like clarification on no improvements may be allowed in a floodplain. I’m looking at that barn. And it’s outside of your development proposed development. The original line is arrow straight it looks structurally sound, I realize it doesn’t meet code and to meet code would be expensive and unfeasible. Since it’s in the floodplain, although it looks like it’s the same elevation as the house and where you’re planted develop. It’s very close. Certainly the barn has stood for over 100 years. I think it’s pretty safe. Without doing improvements, just preservation of the barn, I think would be feasible and may be more appropriate would be more dramatic for individuals coming to see the history of the property. And I wonder if you consider that. So I’d like I’d love to see the barn preserved, maybe with a plaque out there that would give it and it has some again, floodplains, open space around that that would get more feeling of the barn in the farm, I think then outlines in the pavement. And I wonder if that would be something feasible, something you could think about.

Unknown Speaker 44:24
A couple couple inputs. There are a couple things. First of all, the there’s been the riffraff that’s been kind of hanging around those barns and whatnot. So you know that that’s one thing. And then the other is being that there is some structural integrity issues there. It’s it becomes a liability for the property owner. That, you know, really falls on them so on us. So those are some of the considerations we’ve had within that. If

Unknown Speaker 45:01
I can speak a little bit to you again, you talk about the riffraff appropriate use discourages inappropriate use. I’ve seen that in some local parks here. And I think you would see the same thing with a barn, I don’t think you would have riffraff nearly as much of a problem with riffraff when you have traffic going in and out of a 711 all the time. Also, I think, again, when I look at that barn, the doors are open, the windows are open, simply putting locks on the doors and locking the doors and maintaining that sounds like a minimal input, that would have quite a bit of safety associated with it. I think that’s something you could consider.

Unknown Speaker 45:49
I know that I don’t know that it’s the barn in particular, but one of the structures has been boarded up. And, um, the boarded up windows have been removed. And there were individuals living in there, the barn and and the other shelter there has, you know, drug paraphernalia, alcohol, that kind of stuff. So I mean, there is it has like said, I can’t speak on a percent on if the barn is boarded up, I thought that everything was, but there has been problems with people removing the boards and still getting in there.

Unknown Speaker 46:35
I don’t know the property like you folks do. But when I drive by the house is boarded up. But the doors are open to the barn. Gotcha.

Unknown Speaker 46:45
Yeah, I can’t speak on that. So I don’t know for sure. But I know, when we had some of our environmental work out there done, they were a little nervous about it with because someone had been living in there. And it were it was boarded up.

Unknown Speaker 47:02
Commissioner hearties. I just wanted to

Unknown Speaker 47:13
agree with Commissioner Jacoby, that your property is stabilized. And it can be secured. And it’s in a supervised area. Those kinds of abuses normally go away. I’ve I’ve never worked on, I shouldn’t say never, most of the historic properties I’ve worked on in rehab and preservation, did not meet code and did not, you know, would never have passed current structural load calculations, they all require some work to stabilize them. So I don’t I don’t think that’s a good enough excuse not not to put some effort into saving the barn. I’d rather save than all the other measures.

Unknown Speaker 48:02
We did. I know, um, we did have somebody per a structural engineer go out there. And I believe all of that’s been provided, as far as, um, what, what it would take to make those safe

Unknown Speaker 48:19

Unknown Speaker 48:21
I wasn’t implying that it’s easy. I’m just saying that it is done all the time. And I’ve done projects myself where we did that, and totally replaced structure where necessary, or supplemented it with new new structure to, you know, reach the load requirements. The view on the inside of that barn tells me that there’s ample opportunity to add, you know, the kind of bracing and, you know, cable ties or whatever might be needed to fully stabilize the structure. There’s some cost involved, for sure. But I’m just saying that I think that that would be a much stronger statement of the historic character of the site than all of the concrete paving and raised, you know, concrete foundation walls and plaques that are proposed in the other schemes.

Unknown Speaker 49:21
Open. Commissioner Jacoby

Unknown Speaker 49:25
and I, maybe I missed it, but in the previous discussion, what I saw was discussion of bringing the barn and the other structures up to code. And that that was economically not feasible. But we’re not talking about bringing it up to code. We’re talking about just what structural needs does it have and I don’t recall seeing any assessment of just the the required structural needs to maintain the barn as it is. Okay.

Unknown Speaker 49:55
Yeah, I don’t think you’ve provided any cost as far as that goes, it was more so to me Bring it up to code. Right? Yep.

Unknown Speaker 50:01
Brian, do you have I know back in that September meeting, we did have we were given a copy of the structural evaluation, which I don’t know that we have available right now. I don’t know if that’s something that could be brought up and, and shout out to everybody or put up on the screen specific to the barn. But But yeah,

Unknown Speaker 50:25
let me see what I can track down while you guys are chatting.

Unknown Speaker 50:28
Okay. But but right there, I

Unknown Speaker 50:29
mean, there is a there is a step of just pure stabilization. Right. That is a potential other question,

Unknown Speaker 50:40
then, you know, they still sit in that floodplain. So we, you know, there, there is that problem going forward as it as it is, and I think bring it bring it up again, the liability that then lands on the property owner, you know, is it’s a significant little risk or impact that we have to worry about, right? Someone goes out plays around in the barn tries to get in whatever something happens. And you know, that that falls on the property owner. Again,

Unknown Speaker 51:18
I think appropriate use discourages inappropriate use. If you plan to have a very busy 711 and gas station and restaurant there. With with eyes on that property all the time. I don’t think people will be trying to break in actively. Maybe I’m wrong. Maybe at two in the morning, the traffic will be light enough that someone will try to do that, but it seems relatively unlikely to me. And again, the floodplain it may technically be in the floodplain. But that buildings been standing for over 100 years that as a straight to roofline, straighter roofline and some of the houses in my neighborhood here. I live in the historic district. I think it’s held up quite well, I don’t see that floodplain, frankly, being practically a large issue

Unknown Speaker 52:08
sits on the Greenway. So, you know, I think that’s where, you know, some of that might drift in and it is going to be a building out there by itself. I don’t know. I do worry. I still worry about it.

Unknown Speaker 52:28
So I can just one second, and I’ll give you the floor. Can Can staff speak to any potential issue with that being just stabilized in the floodplain with that present a problem? On its, you know, by itself or not?

Unknown Speaker 52:47
Yeah, I mean, I can talk briefly about it. Obviously, I’m not a flood plain administrator. But I did speak with Monica Bartolini, who is our floodplain administrator. And as I mentioned earlier in the discussion is a female mapped floodplain, it’s a local floodplain. So there’s more discretion in terms of what the city can or cannot require. In terms of requirements, I think if if the intent was to do substantial changes to the structure that are most likely or might need to be re are raised out of the floodplain, but if it’s just stabilizing, I’m guessing that probably wouldn’t need to be brought up out of the floodplain.

Unknown Speaker 53:32
Okay, thanks. So

Unknown Speaker 53:33
I was able to find the structural assessment from the September meeting. And I look like I don’t know, I can bring it up on the screen if you want. But it just said in summary and appropriate budget to upgrade the structure. This from a stabilization standpoint, is 75 to $100,000.

Unknown Speaker 53:59
And that’s specific to the barn.

Unknown Speaker 54:00
Yes, the one. Yeah, right. That’s just the barn. I’m just kind of scrolling through here, because I didn’t participate in that meeting. So I’m just gonna

Unknown Speaker 54:11
write and it would be worth seeing if, if that talks about upgrading to, to existing structural loads, right. So if you take an old structure, and you have to make it meet minimum standards that we have today, that can be quite a bit more expensive than just pure stabilization. Were in which case, you know, those snow loads and so on, don’t when loads are not met, but with a historic structure, it’s simply stabilized. So that is a little different, but, but I appreciate to dig in and if you can, if anything else crops up, let us know. In the meantime, I’ll give Commissioner Norton the floor.

Unknown Speaker 54:53
Thank you. Um, you know, I just wanted to kind of go back and revisit this significance of the property and remind the landowner of what we mean when we’re asking for mitigations for historic preservation. So even here in Brian’s fantastic memo that is in our packet tonight, you know, it says, because the property is significant under all four criteria, it’s eligible for the national register, you only need to be eligible under one criteria to be listed on the National Register. And I think I’ve, I’ve stated in previous meetings, that in my professional career, I have almost never seen a property that is significant under all four criteria. So this is an incredibly important property to long mine into telling our history. So any mitigation measures that the city agrees to, should really be in line and scope with that significance. That’s one of the reasons that I I was puzzled and concerned with the with the first stipulation, identifying, you know, installing these funky little concrete outlines that exist, you know, that identify existing foundation locations. Um, I feel like maybe I recognize that you all have been thinking about this. And I appreciate that. I wonder if these have been in discussion with historic preservation professionals? Because I think that there are some significant issues. And I think that with some of these proposals that might not actually meet Historic Preservation ideals for preserving important places and important history. And I really urge you to think about why we’re asking for the barn to be saved in this instance, and why that is so important to a historic preservation commission for telling the history of Longmont. So I agree with my fellow Commissioners, that that is the ideal for this because we will be losing so much of early long line with this development of a 711.

Unknown Speaker 57:36
Thanks for Mr. Norton. Other Commissioner comments, for sure, Jacoby.

Unknown Speaker 57:42
Again, I don’t know how much you’ve pursued the historical aspect as well, I get the sense that you in developing this property, this has been seen as more of a road bump than an interesting avenue to explore. But it again, it may cost $100,000 to stabilize the facility. But the State Historical fund can provide up to $50,000 for rehabilitation expenses if it’s approved. And again, if you pursued historic designation for the barn, you could get funds perhaps from his State Historical Fund, state tax credits of 20% to 35%, for repairs, you know, the system is in place to try to make this easy for you to meet the needs that we see here as a Historical Commission.

Unknown Speaker 58:38
Couple of my comments, I actually thought the, the notion of the concrete patterning of the structures that were removed was it was a pretty interesting approach. So I didn’t have as much of a of an issue with it, understanding that we’re not in that particular case getting true preservation that we’re at least getting some sort of hint of hint of history there. I didn’t mind that. I thought that was an interesting way to approach it. I don’t particularly like the mural idea. But I could see, you know, some combination of that concrete patterning and a video or or signage or something. And if that barn wasn’t sitting out there, in a in it, you know, the barn is a bit of an issue because it’s everything else in order to do your project needs to get done. I mean, those those other structures have to go away, and they’re in pretty poor shape, and I get it. But it’s pretty hard to say, you know, gosh, yeah, for me, if it’s 75,000 to bring the building up to code, it’s probably less than that to stabilize if it’s $50,000 to stabilize it, and you could get a grant from the state historic fund for the $50,000 to stabilize it. You know, it’s a hard sell for us as a commission to say, Well, yeah, we’ll we’ll just let that go. Because it doesn’t, there’s just doesn’t seem to be a reason other than a reluctance and potential, I get the potential insurance risk. Right. Other than that, financially, I’m not even sure there is a risk. So that’s it’s a pretty hard sell. I think here. I do appreciate the thought that went into it. I think you’ve got some creative ideas for the rest of it. But that’s a hard one for me. Brian, you’d get your hand up.

Unknown Speaker 1:00:51
Sorry, I was muted.

Unknown Speaker 1:00:54
When I was talking before. Yeah, this is a very large file for whatever reasons. And it was kind of messing up on the screen when I was talking to the commissioner before. So I’m not sure if I gave you the full flavor in terms of the cost estimate that was provided by And this assessment anyway. So maybe, if I, I can’t really share that with you, because it’s such a large document. Happy to put it up on the screen if I can. So bear with me.

Unknown Speaker 1:01:29
And I think our ARCHITEC is trying to join as well, which can also provide more info on what they’ve done to when they went out there and did the structural assessment.

Unknown Speaker 1:01:45
So can you all see that on the screen?

Unknown Speaker 1:01:49
Yeah. Okay. So.

Unknown Speaker 1:01:54
So there’s different aspects. And I don’t know which components, obviously, the architects on the Commission can certainly provide more feedback regarding this assessment, and I have a screen you had an opportunity to take a look at it. The meeting in September, there’s a discussion and sorry, I can certainly zoom in on Iran on the screen a little bit. There’s a discussion about the different components of this building. And it was related to the roof. And it talked about some potential repairs. And I don’t know if this just to stabilize it, or if it’s just additional upgrades, that would be Nate needed to make it habitable. But anyway, I’m not going to read through this. But if they provided a budget to upgrade the roof of approximately $200,000. I’m not an architect, I don’t know what’s all involved with that, if that’s in fact, just for stabilization, or if it’s for code upgrades, or whatever that might be. And then moving on to the next page. There’s talk about some posts that are the foundation to the ground that would need to be analyzed in terms of their load capacity. And I think that’s where I saw the 75,000 $200,000 to upgrade the structure. That’s what the the those posts that are providing support for the barn. That’s what that assessment evaluation is about. And then And then about repairs needed to the walls. And the number that’s associated with that was $300,000. Whether that’s accurate or not, I don’t know. And then there was some additional second floor images. I think this is second floor. I think their assessment was that it was second floor, the bar was in pretty good shape. Some they thought some of the beams might be were installed in size correctly. So that’s one good thing. They put an assessment of $50,000 for some repairs that might be needed on the second floor, and then the foundation. They showed some images of some cracking in the foundation. I don’t know if that’s substantial or not. So I apologize for my previous comment. They said that the overall I mean, the foundation repairs will be 300 $1,000 Again, I don’t know if that’s, again stabilization or bring it up to code their their plenary total repair budget upgrade this structure would be in excess of $1 million and then bring it up and make it habitable would be $2 million. So All right, thanks.

Unknown Speaker 1:05:23
Thanks, Brian. If

Unknown Speaker 1:05:24
there’s anything else on that document you want to see, let me know. There’s also assessments related to some of the other structures as well.

Unknown Speaker 1:05:33
Okay. Commissioner Norton, you get your hand up?

Unknown Speaker 1:05:38
Yeah, I think what’s missing from this conversation about how much it would cost us for profit company, is what this overall project is costing and what the percentage of stabilization of this one structure would be in relationship to that, that that is numbers that I have not seen presented at any point in these conversations. But also, I’m I don’t have a lot of sympathy for discussing the budget for for 711. And considering the historic preservation in terms of that, I am sure that you will make plenty of money and the times that this 711 and Laredo taco are in existence, on the backs of the loss of our history.

Unknown Speaker 1:06:43
I’ll say, oh, Commissioner goon, you had a question.

Unknown Speaker 1:06:49
I would just say that was pretty harsh. It is a lot of money. And the backs of our history is disappearing every day that that place sits empty. So that is already happening. And it’s been happening for the last I think it was 10 years that that place has been empty, and no one has been wanting to purchase it. So I do I would ask, it sounds like I mean, what you were reading, Brian said it was to bring it all to commercial space. So that was the very first paragraph that you were showing on that very first page, it said it was to bring it to commercial space. So I am curious. I mean, if it’s, you know, under a few 100,000 and not into the millions, it does seem like that maybe that’s worth preserving, especially with the help that you can get other places. And I recognize that grants and delays and everything else, it’s that all costs money. And, you know, all of that stuff costs money as well. And we’ve already been delayed on this, because of, you know, all of the rigmarole is going through, but it’s all part of this major piece of long lawns history that, you know, maybe maybe wasn’t taken as seriously as we might have wanted to at the very beginning, when you first purchased the place, and you didn’t realize how deep of a piece of history that is. So it I think it would be helpful to to get an idea of how that barn could be preserved in a manner that isn’t, isn’t costing 2 million, but at least could stand there. And you know, what is the difference in your liability between this insurance and this insurance that would be worth knowing when you’re going forward? If you need our approval, it sounds like it’s past Planning and Zoning already. It sounds like the city of Longmont has no interest in it, which is odd to me. Maybe they could even subsidize some of that insurance as far as that’s concerned. But there’s other ideas out there that, you know, maybe taken more seriously than than a mural and I love to read the plaques on walks but it doesn’t reconstruct. So when you when you do lose a big barn like that, that’s kind of major. But we are losing it every day that passes without anything happening. So there’s that

Unknown Speaker 1:09:19
big commission agreement Commissioner Sibley. The mute

Unknown Speaker 1:09:27
sorry, um, you guys have spoken beautifully about the barn so I have nothing to add to that, um, the the smaller structures that we’ve got the outlines for. I think that’s an interesting idea, especially in the parking lot and whatnot and combined with the signage. I think that’s great. The buildings that are in the grass area, though, just an idea. Instead, if instead of concrete, what about doing some sort of shadow line been building or not building but like, you know, the outline of it or somehow doing roofing, even if it was like, play slash picnic area, something like that. Just Food for Thought basically just kind of taking your idea and maybe doing something else with with those structures anyway. So that’s it.

Unknown Speaker 1:10:26
Thank you. I do think that based on the experience that I’ve had working with historic buildings, as an architect, that that 2 million or 3 million number is pretty, pretty inflated in terms of what it would take to for stabilization. Because again, if you’re, if you’re purely stabilizing, you could really take a decent look at the foundations, my guess I don’t know, it’s hard to tell from a few pictures. But my guess is, again, very often these buildings have been there for a very long time. If they’re not, if they’re not literally falling down, then they’re probably reasonably stable. You’re not using the space inside, it could be stabilized with some pretty rough methods, which would be not particularly cost costly. So I think there would be an opportunity to stabilize that and, you know, repaint, and just have that structure out there. So I guess one thing to ask is, is there any scenario under which you would accept or entertain such a condition?

Unknown Speaker 1:11:43
You know, I think, again, it’s just in being in real estate and a property owner. I think, all that. And by the way, I think someone was mentioned, we don’t actually own the property yet. We’re just the developer going through planning to do this. So. But we, you know, there’s the liability. There’s also the ongoing maintenance of such I mean, we could get it to a certain condition. And then you also have that piece of it. wondering, you know, if there was the way to dedicate these buildings to the city, and that liability falls towards the municipality, or whatever it might be, but I think there’s different things that can be talked about, I guess, there.

Unknown Speaker 1:12:38
Brian, I’m wondering, you know, it feels like obviously, the commission is pretty, pretty adamant about the barn, if we were to make a recommendation to approve provided that they stabilize the barn and kept that on the property. That goes as a recommendation. What what happens from there, you know, it goes to does it go back to planning? Is this just your are P and z is just just going to see counsel to both? Do they take our consideration? And maybe if they don’t like it, the pick from some of the app, just trying to wonder, you know, a what’s our is it worth giving them a preferred and secondary option? What’s the process from here?

Unknown Speaker 1:13:32
Well, great question. Commissioner lane. You know, I think, depending upon the Commission’s recommendation, I’d have to talk with our staff and maybe legal and, and then it may end up since council was the ultimate decision making body on the approval of the rezoning and the overall development plan, I suspect, it would probably end unless the the property owner and applicant agreed to the recommendation from the Commission, I suspect it would probably end up going back to the Council for a final determination.

Unknown Speaker 1:14:17
Okay. And just to put it out there, I mean, my my personal preference would be that there’s a way to stabilize the barn. However, if, if that was the sole commission recommendation, and it got ignored at the end, and nothing happened. I think that would be worse. And so I’d be inclined to consider a backup plan at the risk of understanding that that might undermine the former it’s a it’s a tough position to be in. But if there were a backup plan in My mind it might look something like asking for the, the outlines, the I don’t particularly love the mural, but the video and or plaques and then at an absolute minimum deconstruction and salvage of the barn materials just for discussion any comments, Commissioner comments? Commissioner goon?

Unknown Speaker 1:15:36
Well, I have a question the 141,000 donation to the Greenway? Is that part of what you had to agree to, to get planning and zoning to pass it? Because maybe there can be some negotiation in there, you stabilize the barn, give it to the Greenway. And and then the city covers the 80 liability or something on there, you know, something along those lines. So, Commissioner,

Unknown Speaker 1:16:01
Sorry, continue writing in a row? No,

Unknown Speaker 1:16:05
I was I was done.

Unknown Speaker 1:16:07
Okay. I think my understanding is that the $141,000 payment to the city is actually a payment in lieu for future improvements for Greenway improvements. And I do not believe that it’s related to historic preservation.

Unknown Speaker 1:16:27
But is it a requirement to get the zoning redone for this project.

Unknown Speaker 1:16:32
So that would be a stipulation of in full entitlements of the of the project is that the developer would be responsible for paying the $141,000. It’s kind of like a cash out, instead of them constructing the Greenway improvements, the city will construct those Greenway improvements in the future. And that’s what the cost to the developers

Unknown Speaker 1:16:58
and Greenway improvements are required.

Unknown Speaker 1:17:00
Yes, that’s a requirement.

Unknown Speaker 1:17:04
See, to me, this city needs different priorities here, the Greenway versus this historic site, in where, where it should be looking at its money. And I’m not sure how to fight that I don’t even know. You know, there’s so many different pieces, all of them separated, and making decisions on something like this. If we could get the city to recognize how this how great of a historic place this is. We have the write up of it, maybe sending that as Aaron Rodriguez around, can he deliver that to the city council? And, you know, I’m not even sure what the steps are here. Sharon’s, always wanting us to do something. And this is partly why we’re all separated. What do we do?

Unknown Speaker 1:17:55
Well, I suspect and like I said, we’d have to have additional conversation, I say bye, we staff additional conversations after we hear what the recommendation is from the Commission. If we end up going back to city council, with a recommendation from the Commission that the property owner developer object to, then, you know, we would present that information in terms of the, you know, the fact that the property is eligible for designation on the National Register. I think that was noted in the council communication. I’m not sure if the full report was presented to the council as part of the packet of materials, but I suspect that we’d want to provide that information if in fact, the Commission recommended that the barn remained and the like I said the the the owner developer did not agree to that recommendation.

Unknown Speaker 1:19:07
Mr. Jacoby

Unknown Speaker 1:19:10
another thought again, the city is not interested in the property. Again, when you look at the details of that when I spoke to Mr. Bell, the director of parks and open space, he was only peripherally aware of the property’s historic value. When I discussed it with him. He was he sounded quite interested. And then he dropped it like a lead weight when he heard it would cost millions of dollars literally, to upgrade the property. But he did not go into the detail that we’re going to hear about preservation versus upgrading and improving the property. And he was we were looking at that time at the whole property, as opposed to just the barn perhaps, it may be beneficial to re approach parks and open space and say, Would you want to take over maintenance of the barn alone? Or take the property on or just take the maintenance of the of the barn alone on for historic purposes. And when I maintenance? Again, Mr. Pollack, you mentioned that you’re concerned about that, if we’re not using the interior of the barn maintenance is putting a good roof on it and keeping the paint on it. There’s, again, the ongoing maintenance, the cost, his concern, and your concern, I imagine is, again, how much is this going to be a money pit? I think that the cost of maintain structurally maintaining it should be reasonable. But we don’t know that cost again. Rejected? Brian, you went through some of the numbers. But again, you weren’t sure if that was for improvements, bringing up the code? Or is that just maintenance? My impression was that was to bring it up to code. We don’t even have good numbers. And it would really help me to know what we should do. If we had good numbers for from someone who is experienced in preservation. Just look not just an engineer looking at upgrading, but I’m an experienced in preservation, what would it cause to just structurally maintain this place? I think that would help all of us to move forward here. Right,

Unknown Speaker 1:21:32
commissioners? Commissioner Gordon, do you still have your hand up?

Unknown Speaker 1:21:35
No, that was that wasn’t.

Unknown Speaker 1:21:39
So I haven’t had an opportunity to speak with David Bell, who’s the director of natural resources? I think that’s not as official? Generally. That’s correct. And Glenn, I don’t know if you’re listening, if you’re able, if you had a chance to talk with David at all about the bar.

Unknown Speaker 1:22:02
Briefly, and I think his concerns are a lot of what we’re hearing from the developer. It’s, we don’t have a use for it. And it’s a bit of a liability. And there’s ongoing maintenance, but we didn’t get into, you know, the real dollars to keep it from falling down. Or in a whole lot of detail. But yeah, he’s Parks and Recreation. So it’s about providing that trail and, and, and preserving the open space, which was part of what the developer did, as well as dedicate a good portion of the land over there from the trail. But no, I haven’t spoken in detail. But yeah, it was just additional costs that he was concerned about.

Unknown Speaker 1:22:53
And it Glenn, did you have any other comments about kind of process? If in fact, the Commission recommends that the barn be retained on site? That was was my comments fairly accurate?

Unknown Speaker 1:23:10
Yeah. And Brian and I talked about it in detail. Because you do have two boards that are recommending to city council, do you have an HP are planning commission and yourselves as, as the historic preservation commission, I believe both those recommendations were presented to city council. They weighed them and they accepted the recommendation from or from the planning commission. And at the end of that it says, reference historic references to be included in development as site with implementation in accordance with the historic preservation commission and city staff. So they kind of gave you another shot at it. And I think that’s what we’re doing here. If the applicant I think doesn’t agree with your recommendation, I think Brian’s right. We go back to council as the decider, basically.

Unknown Speaker 1:24:11
Thank you. Hey, Commissioner. Commissioner lane, I believe the one of the design members of the design team Tanner is on the call.

Unknown Speaker 1:24:21
Right? Yeah, looks like you have your hand up. Go ahead. And yeah,

Unknown Speaker 1:24:24
good evening. Also, I’m a little late. One thing I haven’t heard mentioned and want to bring back up and then maybe it was earlier. That barn is in the floodplain. So any improvements structurally to this will have to get reviewed separately. We do know that there could be environmental hazards in that floodplain with that building as is, especially if it does flood out and fall down. It could potentially pose some hazards that would be of concern to such as FEMA, but that is one additional rule. wrinkle in all this needs to be considered, in my opinion that, again, this barn is in a in a condition that we would have any improvements we make or would have to make to keep it would have additional reviews inside that floodplain.

Unknown Speaker 1:25:17
So Tanner, just update you. I know you weren’t on the call, but I did speak with Monica Bartolini, who’s our floodplain administrator. And she mentioned that that floodplain is not a FEMA floodplain. So it’s a plane. And so you know, it’d be under the city’s jurisdiction to make a determination of what won’t be required in terms of stabilization or improvements to the bar.

Unknown Speaker 1:25:42
Thanks, Commissioner Norton, you get your hand raised.

Unknown Speaker 1:25:46
So from previous conversations, I believe I remember that the landowner has owned this property for at least a decade and it sat vacant. Part of the reason that we are at the point where we are is because there hasn’t been any sort of ongoing maintenance to these buildings. I don’t understand how the city allowed that I as a landowner in Longmont, I’m not sure that I would be allowed to just let my property sit derelict for a decade. But I think some responsibility needs to be taken for that, when you’re thinking about the historic preservation of this. I, I think that that has been a unethical thing to do to this property. And then for us all to turn around and say it’s too expensive to preserve, and to walk away from it.

Unknown Speaker 1:26:40
And just, if I could just interject, I know that I did speak with an individual who did approach the property owner. And this was probably five years ago or so who had an interest in purchasing the property and rehabbing the house and all the structures at that time. But because of the zoning on the property, the property was asking a lot more than what he could afford to in terms of purchase of a property since it was commercially or industrially zoned. In terms of your comments regarding the city not enforcing maintenance. That’s the Alec said, I don’t know the history on that. And whether we’ve had I don’t know exactly how long we’ve had a property maintenance code. But it typically a lot of times that’s based on staff availability to enforce all of that as well and complaints that we receive. So.

Unknown Speaker 1:27:41
Thanks for any other questions or comments to be made. Then we are being asked for recommendations.

Unknown Speaker 1:28:07
We recommend more looking into the price of just maintaining, you know, keeping getting the barn not up to code but sound enough to, you know, a new roof new paint job

Unknown Speaker 1:28:24
or approving. So would that be basically a motion to request the applicant to provide a structural stabilization cost only and come back to us with with that information in their next hearing if that’s possible. Yeah.

Unknown Speaker 1:28:42
And I know that cost money for you guys, I’m sorry, but it does seem like a reasonable request.

Unknown Speaker 1:28:49
Okay. We’re so emotional for Commissioner Hardy’s.

Unknown Speaker 1:28:54
I just like to comment that if we request that kind of a report, that’d be prepared by a historic preservation architect and not not by an engineer or other party who’s not experienced in in preservation issues.

Unknown Speaker 1:29:16
So, Mr. Ortiz, could you maybe perhaps suggest a a altered amendment than just so we have a rule, and I would only request that you add a historic preservation architect or engineer there are? There are engineers that are very well versed? Yes.

Unknown Speaker 1:29:38
I would amend that motion to require that the the additional study and report be prepared by a historic preservation architect or engineer.

Unknown Speaker 1:29:51
And is that amendment acceptable to Commissioner goon?

Unknown Speaker 1:29:59
I I have no idea of costs. I don’t know what the difference in costs and architects and engineers are, you know, I just want something reasonable. That can be done. So maybe I don’t know my amendment or my motion. And and Mr. Hardy, maybe you can just start fresh. Start a fresh one and we can go from there.

Unknown Speaker 1:30:21
Alright, fair enough. Let’s do that. That’s cleaner.

Unknown Speaker 1:30:24
And then I move that we recommend that the applicant prepare a new or supplemental report on the condition of the barn and the potential cost of stabilization and securing it to be prepared by a qualified Historic Preservation architect or engineer.

Unknown Speaker 1:30:52
Okay, we have a motion on the floor. I’ll second. All right. We have a motion and a second. Is there any further discussion?

Unknown Speaker 1:31:06
No. Then was yours. Can you call the roll for us please?

Unknown Speaker 1:31:16
Chairman Lane about Yes. Commissioner Hardee’s? Yes. Commissioner Norton. Yes. Commissioner goon. Yes. Commissioner Jacoby? Yes. Commissioner Sibley? Yes. Thank

Unknown Speaker 1:31:34
you. All right. So that motion passes unanimously. And that is our recommendation at the time being, I hope that the app, I realized that this is a cumbersome process, but I hope that the applicant, you get some sense of how important we feel like this piece is, in part because of that history. You know, it’s a strong component, and we’re trying to every thing we lose is gone forever. So thank you for joining us and hope that you, in fact, follow that recommendation.

Unknown Speaker 1:32:12
I just want to make certain that you guys have you guys have the history. architects, builders, you guys have that history that we received.

Unknown Speaker 1:32:24
Yeah, they would have that. All right. All right,

Unknown Speaker 1:32:34
well, then, we’ll go ahead and close that particular agenda item.

Unknown Speaker 1:32:42
And we’ll move on to our next item, which is a series. So your new business item A would be HPC code amendments and design guidelines update.

Unknown Speaker 1:33:01
I will well, thank you commissioners for the discussion on the previous item. So just a quick update. You guys may have some questions. I know. Sharon Alarie. Have some public comments earlier in the public advisory board regarding this topic. As mentioned at the assessments, meeting as part of the Commission’s discussion, session, remove the Remove reviewed, sorry, reviewed the AAPC retreat minutes from March 2021. And we continue that discussion in terms of kind of what the Commission’s priorities and interests were particularly for this year, and kind of going forward. And as noted towards the end of the meeting, and I think they were kind of captured in the meeting minutes that you approved earlier, during this meeting was that the main priorities obviously are the code amendments, the neighborhood design guidelines and developing a community Historic Preservation Plan, which presently preservation plan is another topic on the agenda. And, and then there was other things identified as time and staff resources permit. And then also, as I mentioned that last month’s meeting, we have hired a consultant to help us with the rewrite of the code amendments. And we did have a conversation regarding a number of topics with the code consultant late last month, a couple of weeks ago. There’s a number of policy topics that I mentioned that last month’s meeting that we need to discuss with city council and get get direction on before we complete the drafting of the code amendments. And some of those are outlined in the And the staff communication. And I’m happy to if you have any questions about that, happy to chat with you about that. So our next step, obviously, we don’t have a red line for the commission to review. But we’re working on that. We need to have a discussion with city council regarding certain policy topics to get direction, because we don’t want to go down a path with the Commission and then hear back from the council that well, we’re not interested in considering that. So we’d like to get direction from the council first. So we know we’re headed down the right path. So as noted in the communication, I think our target still this year is to complete the amendments during the second or third quarter of this year. And I know we’re also going to be talking with the council and getting some direction also regarding the design guidelines topic as well, in terms of the kind of the scope and applicability and a variety of different topics related to that. So. So that’s basically kind of a quick update in a nutshell. I don’t know if you have any specific questions or comments at this point in time.

Unknown Speaker 1:36:16
Thanks, Brian. Any comments or questions from commissioners?

Unknown Speaker 1:36:22
I know, I know, you’re anxious to get moving forward. And I know things were delayed last year. And so we’re trying to move it forward as quickly as we can

Unknown Speaker 1:36:33
appreciate that we have at least one person in the city in the outer citizenry that reminds us every month that we’re not moving fast enough. So

Unknown Speaker 1:36:42
I understand. Yes. I totally understand that. I certainly appreciate the Commission’s interest of these topics.

Unknown Speaker 1:36:54
Okay. Well, yeah, if we can just keep getting, you know, an update as to status at every one of these hearings, that would be helpful.

Unknown Speaker 1:37:04
Yeah, happy to do that. As we add more information to share, we’re certainly willing to share it. Okay.

Unknown Speaker 1:37:11
Well, there are no other comments or questions on that particular item, we’ll move on to Item b, which is the historic preservation plan.

Unknown Speaker 1:37:18
Okay, yeah. And last month, we talked about this item as well. And I know, it’s one of the one of the priorities for the commission. And I know before Jade left, she had actually been working on a potential grant application, I’m not sure if it was ever submitted. For state historic fund grants, I saw a draft in one of our folders. I don’t know how if you know, if it was ever submitted through the state of Starclan, grant process,

Unknown Speaker 1:37:49
um, I believe she submitted it to the CLG grant process. And unfortunately, I think it wasn’t chosen. So

Unknown Speaker 1:37:57
okay. And so what I wanted to do was just have a kind of a brief discussion, I provided some examples that I just ran across did locally, with Boulder, Lewisville and Lafayette, which all seemed like, you know, kind of similar in their scope. You know, they talk about kind of a community’s history and history, background of the historic preservation program, community outreach efforts related to preservation, preservation grants, goals and objectives, and then implementation strategies and timelines. So if the commission is aware, but one thing that’s pretty Lewisville is program is that they actually have a dedicated sales tax, I think of a quarter of a percent for preservation program. So they’ve been able able to utilize that for some pretty neat preservation projects in their community. And so, just wanted to see if, you know, the examples that I provided in the packet were generally kind of along the lines of what the commission was thinking in terms of what our objectives were in terms of a preservation plan for for llama. Right.

Unknown Speaker 1:39:17
Thanks. Thanks for that, um, I have to say, I wasn’t able to spend quite as much time digging through all those, you know, the short time till we get this meeting. I’d like to spend some more time on it and maybe have this topic come up on the agenda next month, where maybe I’d ask commissioners to really spend a little more time with those plans and come back with you know, maybe a little more specific outline of what, you know, what we liked and or didn’t find appropriate, but But certainly, if there’s any immediate comments from from anyone happy to open that up now. Yeah. And

Unknown Speaker 1:39:53
I think that’s a good suggestion. Commissioner lane. I know, you know, obviously, you didn’t have a lot of time to digest this. We could certainly bring this back for the main meeting for discussion. Great.

Unknown Speaker 1:40:07
Any immediate reaction or comments here? No. So let’s do that. Let’s let’s plan on having this on next month’s agenda with and then again, I’d ask the commissioners to do a little more deep dive into those three plans provided and you know, be able to make comments regarding what what we think might be appropriate for for Lamont

Unknown Speaker 1:40:30
a NFIP, if you might, if I don’t mind, I don’t mind. That’s one of the I probably should have just included a link as opposed to all the pages, I don’t know your preferences and rather getting all the documents as part of the packet or if you’d prefer just to have a link to the plans? I don’t know, if you care one way or the other. It didn’t matter to me, okay.

Unknown Speaker 1:40:53
Doesn’t look like anybody. Yeah, either way. Yep. Okay, great. Well, that’s very helpful. Give us some, some baseline to start with. And then we again, we can continue that discussion. And I guess I would just want to be mindful of any grant opportunities out there to fund this plant, you know, fund, the consultant that would be required to put this plan together. Like to not lose track of, of those opportunities, I think Jade was pretty rushed at the end of last year trying to come up with come up with that. And that may or may not had any effect on whether the fact that we didn’t get it, but

Unknown Speaker 1:41:37
we’re aware. And I know, we’re hoping to put together kind of a schedule of potential available grants that we could share with the Commission. And we can talk about that at the next meeting as well if we have that available. And then we kind of talk about timeframes. And what’s I mean, what’s realistic in terms of timeframes, because I know it takes a while to prepare these grant applications. And I know history, Colorado, in the past, at least, has had an opportunity for different jurisdictions to share their draft grant applications and get feedback before they make a formal final application. And so I think, you know, in order to have a good submittal, I think that would be something that we certainly want to pursue, if at all possible.

Unknown Speaker 1:42:23
Agreed. Well, that sounds great. I like the idea of, you know, having those grants out on the table to discuss as well.

Unknown Speaker 1:42:30
Sure. Okay. Thank you.

Unknown Speaker 1:42:36
Okay, item C was historic preservation month, which is this May. And, Brian, you provided a memo here for us with some information on the museum staff and and their plans and the Callahan house at one point, sort of pre COVID, we had talked about getting this commission to get a little tour of the Callahan house, I don’t know if that’s still something that’s people are interested in or, or what but yeah, let’s, is there anything you want to just kind of overview us on on on the preservation month?

Unknown Speaker 1:43:12
Yeah, I’ll be quick on this. As mentioned in the communication, typically, we do a proclamation with city council regarding Historic Preservation month. I know in the past, we’ve also both the museum staff and former planning staff and Karen Bryant did a number of historic walking tours in both the downtown historic east side and West Side neighborhoods. And then Eric Mason, who’s the curator at the museum has also done the walking tours as well. And he has some plan for this June, there’s none currently planned for May. But there are several that are planned for the month of June, including the downtown area, as well as the historic corridor along Third Avenue. And then also, Jennifer and I met with Kathy Korpela, who’s the Callahan house manager, a couple of weeks ago to talk about a they got a fairly large grant from the state historic fund. For some preservation work or on the restoration work, I should say, on different aspects of the Callahan house, one large component of that is restoration of the original driveway, which is pretty unique if you’ve ever seen pictures of that. And then also some work on the stained glass windows as well, and a few other components. And we actually invited Kathy to come to the May meeting. And she’s accepted that just to provide kind of a overview of the Callahan house and then also talk a little bit about these restoration programs that are kind of underway. With Grant funding through the state historic fund. I believe that grant If that was received was around $180,000, and then the city provided $60,000 of matching funds for that work. So, so I’m sure that, you know, maybe next month’s meeting, may I think it’s May 5, you we could talk about whether or not the commission is interested in having a tour of the Callahan house. And obviously, there’s other city owned facilities that are also historic landmarks and several that are on the National Register, such as the firehouse Art Center, and then also the, the Carnegie Library. So and then, so there’s, there’s a few other city owned historical landmarks as well, one being out of the sandstone Ranch, the Moors Kaufman house, which is the visitor center out there, if anybody of you been out there. Pretty, pretty neat place. So aside from that, just wanted to see if the commission had any other ideas or suggestions, and obviously staff doesn’t have a lot of time to revert to prepare events. But if there’s anything else that you’re aware of, that’s going on in the neighborhoods, whether that’s historic Eastside neighborhood or anywhere else in the community that might have something in relationship to historic preservation. Yeah, this let us know we could certainly put that information on our website.

Unknown Speaker 1:46:26
Great. Thanks, Brian. Commissioner, Kobe.

Unknown Speaker 1:46:29
Yeah. I don’t know if you’re aware. I was involved. I basically made a tour of the historic East Side neighborhood. It’s a very involved tour. It’s a three hour long tour.

Unknown Speaker 1:46:44
Gilligan’s Island.

Unknown Speaker 1:46:46
Yeah, exactly. That’s what I thought of, but it’s not as disastrous as the SS minnow, I did. Surveys, and I got glowing reviews. People loved the tour. It is very long, and it’s not for everybody, but I put it online as well. And anybody can do the tour at any time and little bits, and it has a lot of history of Longmont in it. And I’ve approached Eric Mason, and asked last year during the 100 and 50th celebration. Can you advertise this with everything else? He said no, because the historic Eastside neighborhood association is, which, technically I did it under that umbrella is not officially part of the city. So there’s no way that I can advertise this tour as being available right now that I know of without putting ads in the paper and personal expense. And if there’s some way we can put the get word out that this tour is available online. I mean, you just go to the historic Eastside neighborhood association webpage, which is Hina 80501 dot O R G, and you can click on tour, and you can see the tour, I have the whole script there, you can click on the map of the tour. But I can’t get the word out. And I’m not sure what I can do. Because everybody who’s gone on the tour has said that they loved it and that they’d like to see more people go on it. But I don’t know how to get the word out and make it official to get beyond that

Unknown Speaker 1:48:22
hurdle of being official. Yeah, thanks,

Unknown Speaker 1:48:25
Rick. I appreciate that. That I think Sharon might have mentioned that briefly to me that you did a tour last year there before. And so yeah, let me check what I know. We got a neighborhood resources coordinator. I don’t know, I guess I don’t know if there’s limitations on our ability to advertise other organizations, tours or events. But let me let me do some checking on that. See if there’s any opportunities related to that.

Unknown Speaker 1:48:54
I know that the museum has a website that says you can take these tours online, if they could just add a line that says something like, you know, we do not endorse this. This was a privately made tour. But here’s another historic tour. You know, I mean, that just takes putting one more line on a website, I don’t. Sure. Anyway, I have given a tour to over 350 people believe it or not, and it’s amazing the responses I’ve gotten, well, they start with 350, probably half to three quarters, making it to the end. Once you make it to the end like it so again, if we can get the word out, I think that’s the resource you’re going to get. Thank you.

Unknown Speaker 1:49:37
That’s a histogram you should go on. histo Enduro. Krishna goon. You had a question?

Unknown Speaker 1:49:43
Well, I was just wondering if as a member of the historic preservation commission, isn’t he under the guise of the town now? Couldn’t that be a official? This is an official tour. Now. It’s not it’s not just some, some guy on Emery street

Unknown Speaker 1:49:59
Well, that may be an end I’ll have to charge.

Unknown Speaker 1:50:05
And, Commissioner, you call me maybe I’ll write you later. But I was wondering if you’re really good at writing maybe an article for The Times call about that, you know, about the history of that place around 119 might be a worthy, and we could all sign it for historic preservation month, that might be something kind of exciting. I don’t people don’t know that history. I certainly didn’t. I’ve lived here my whole life, I’ve taken tons of history classes in about Longmont and I did not know that piece of property was that special.

Unknown Speaker 1:50:43
You’re suggesting writing an essay about Mary Dickens and the property out there. But then to say that it’s going to be developed, you know, that’s getting into a political kind of thing that I, especially as a commissioner, I’m not sure I should be doing.

Unknown Speaker 1:50:59
I don’t know, I don’t know that you need to mention the development or, or anything, just this is everybody’s seen the place. Everybody knows what it looks like. And just leave it at that that’s this is the history of that place. You know, it’s just an idea. And I know I do not have time to, to do do storytelling from the information that was given to us in the next month. So you’re a good writer.

Unknown Speaker 1:51:26
I’ve found my I’ve written to the paper, probably more often than I should you may have seen if you read the editorials sometimes, but their acceptance is very variable. I’m not sure what they would maybe I should talk to the paper first see what they want for that.

Unknown Speaker 1:51:42
Yeah. Talk to John Don camp for somebody about an actual news. Not a new story, but a human life and lifestyle story, you know, not not a letter to the editor? Nothing. Nothing political. But yeah.

Unknown Speaker 1:51:58
To try any other Yeah, Brian,

Unknown Speaker 1:52:02
you’ve got I just kind of mentioned, I know that. I think History Colorado has put together a calendar of events around the state for historic preservation. But I recall previously, and I have to check on this that historic boulder round table, and then I think Boulder County also had event calendars, I’m going to check and see if they’re also kind of keeping that going. And that may be another venue Rick for if you know the roundtable maybe it’s not associated with a specific jurisdiction, that that might be an opportunity to advertise that particular event that that venue so I can check on that. Great, thank you. Okay,

Unknown Speaker 1:52:53
let’s go on to Item eight D, which is the our future HPC meetings, and we had that little kind of online survey. Ron gave us kind of a summary about that. But I guess at this point, we you know, is there a desire for next or next meetings to be in person or continue online

Unknown Speaker 1:53:22
so just a little background before you guys vote, you know, it probably won’t be for a month or two before we actually have the capability if the commission is interested in going back in person. There’s some logistics behind the scenes regarding reservation of the council chambers that that hasn’t really happened for the boards and commissions for a couple of years with the pandemic. And then you know, there’s probably some new training because there’s new equipment since the Council Chambers was remodeled last year. So there’s probably new training on the on the equipment for the Commission as well. So I know that I think that the for example, the planning commission may be discussing going back but I think that really is they might be going back as in June. So anyway, just just to preface it.

Unknown Speaker 1:54:13
Okay, thanks,

Unknown Speaker 1:54:14
commissioners any any thoughts on that oh, sorry,

Unknown Speaker 1:54:25
it’s very hard.

Unknown Speaker 1:54:27
I prefer to meet in person I just you know, staring at a screen as it’s it’s a bit much but um, if somebody is not comfortable meeting in person still dated COVID I totally understand and and fine.

Unknown Speaker 1:54:43
Yeah, and I’m kind of in the same way if we could get back in person, I think I’d probably prefer that. But not to the point. That would mean there are some minor conveniences here, especially with people checking in and and, and getting in if you’re running late or even some of the applicants coming in late, but I don’t love the the delays in in getting public here. And I think there may be that might be a barrier to getting a little more public comment just because it’s kind of feels a little cumbersome. So I I’d like to see us get back in person but I don’t need to push it too hard.

Unknown Speaker 1:55:28
For my part, I’m happy to meet you all in person, you know, haven’t done that yet. It’s open coding. And as far as public invited to be heard Sharon can walk down to the meeting just as well as calls she she knows where they’re at.

Unknown Speaker 1:55:47
Any other comments?

Unknown Speaker 1:55:52
And we probably need a motion to meet back in person if that’s what the direction is.

Unknown Speaker 1:56:05
I moved that we start meeting back in person as soon as it’s allowable through the city staff and training and all of that.

Unknown Speaker 1:56:16
Okay. motion. Seconded.

Unknown Speaker 1:56:20
All right. We’ve got a motion by Commissioner goon seconded by Commissioner Jacoby to move back to in person meetings at the earliest time that sort of works out for the city. Zeroes would you call the roll force?

Unknown Speaker 1:56:39
Chairman lane. I vote yes. Commissioner Hardys? Yes. Commissioner Norton? Yes. Commissioner goon. Yes. Commissioner Jacoby? Yes. Commissioner Sibley? Yes.

Unknown Speaker 1:56:57
Okay, great. Well, we’ll put it in the hands of staff to let us know when that’s the appropriate move, and and where we’re going. So we would be back in council chambers because that work has been done. And, and it’s operational now. Because it was closed for a little while before we before?

Unknown Speaker 1:57:19
Yeah, the remodel has been completed. And, you know, I know, on occasion we met here at the Development Services Center, when we had special meetings and such, but I think the normal location is in the council chambers.

Unknown Speaker 1:57:33
Okay, great. And whatever is appropriate in terms of training. If it’s, you know, I guess we can talk with commissioners about it. But maybe it’s a half hour early start to just get some technology training versus old another session or whatever works. Thank you. Okay. And then our last item under new business, eight E is board recruitment and interviews.

Unknown Speaker 1:58:03
All right, so we discussed this a little bit last month as well and provided some updates in terms of some documents that the city clerk’s office put together, as well as the kind of amended rules of procedure of city council. The City Council’s interested in getting input from the Commission on the potential appointees for their particular commission. It’s a recommendation they’re not making the you know, the commissioners are making the final decision. Ultimately City Council make that final decision, but they’re asking for a the each commission and board to interview the applicants and then also to make a recommendation on the applicants to the city council. And so one of the one of the questions for the commission was whether or not the commission would like to appoint a subcommittee of two members to do the interviews and then report back to the full commission or to interview applicants as an entire commission at a at a meeting some and so we’ve got one point mid year appointment that is being advertised for vacant. And so that would be one interview only for the commission that would have to be conducted in the month of May. So we just have to coordinate that for that mid year. So there will likely obviously there’ll be additional end of year appointments as well. But this is just for the mid year appointment that we need to do an interview in the month of May.

Unknown Speaker 1:59:51
Thanks and just to clarify, this is moving completely from the city council members being involved at all to only the commission In members, whether it’s fuller or partial, making that first recommendation

Unknown Speaker 2:00:07
Yeah, normally the in previous interviews the Commission’s and the staff liaisons were not involved with the interviews at all. It was strictly council members interviewing the the applicants. So this is a new layer, that counsel is requested to get input from the commissioners as they make their decisions on potential appointees. Okay. Thanks.

Unknown Speaker 2:00:34
Any thoughts from the Commission on an approach here?

Unknown Speaker 2:00:53
While you’re contemplating that there was also an attachment there was a list of questions that was put forth in terms of specific questions that was recommended that the HBC asked to the interviewees. But there’s also an opportunity for the commission to add additional questions that you might feel as appropriate, given kind of the nature of the commission. And Glenn, did you have anything else you wanted to add? Yeah, I

Unknown Speaker 2:01:23
just wanted to add one thing at a part of your decision should probably be based on how many applicants you have if you get one applicant, if we could just knock it out at your next meeting. But if there’s five, we might want to think about a subcommittee, doing the interviews and then bringing it back to the board. And we probably have to do like a special meeting with a subcommittee, but I think it’s April 25. Brian, is the date that we should know what that number is.

Unknown Speaker 2:01:56
Yeah, I think that’s the deadline for applicants to submit their applications.

Unknown Speaker 2:02:08
I suggest we hold off until May.

Unknown Speaker 2:02:16
I guess, is there maybe the is there any sense of whether there’s a preference to just have applicants come to an HPC meeting or the subcommittee or is Glenn suggestion of making that flexible based on the number of applicants to kind of their preferred path.

Unknown Speaker 2:02:44
Everyone’s time is valuable. And setting aside a second time during the month for interviews, in addition to a time for the HPC meeting. Doesn’t sound like a lot. But somehow it always seems to be a lot of effort on people’s time. I think unless there’s an overwhelming demand for people to be on the commission, that we just do it together at the next meeting, or at a meeting. Also, I’m not even aware of the requirements. I know that a certain percentage of commissioners need to have professional qualifications, which I don’t in historic preservation, I don’t even know the numbers. So I don’t even know what the qualifications are in order to interview somebody. So I think as a doing it together as a commission might be better, so long as the numbers reasonable.

Unknown Speaker 2:03:34
Yeah, in terms of the qualifications, if you look through the interview guide, that’s an attachment. It talks about 40% of the commission, at least three members need to be professional, which includes architects, historic preservationist archaeology, archaeology, museum curators and such.

Unknown Speaker 2:03:57
Okay, do we need a formal vote on this or not?

Unknown Speaker 2:04:03
I mean, I think if you want to defer until we see how many applicants we can kind of make a decision at a later point. You know, we could reconvene, like I said, as Glenn mentioned, if it’s one or two applicants, we could we could cover it at the May 5 meeting. Certainly. Okay.

Unknown Speaker 2:04:25
Does anyone object to that approach, just basically planning on handling it at the next meeting, provided the number isn’t? Somehow I have a hard time imagining there are going to be 500 people lining up the historic preservation commissioners. But I could be wrong. All right. I think that’s what we’re, I think that’s what we’re leaning towards is handling at the meeting. Next month’s meeting.

Unknown Speaker 2:04:55
Can I just say real quick thank you for this guide. This is really thorough. Oh, with the rubric and everything, and I appreciate the city staff writing this up and providing it to us. Sure.

Unknown Speaker 2:05:13
Yeah, I agree that there’s a lot of great information in this whole packet.

Unknown Speaker 2:05:17
And like I said, One thing I’d suggest before, maybe before before the next meeting, if you do have any suggestions, regarding any additional questions, as regarding the interviews that you would like to consider, or have the commission considered for adding to the interview questions, that’d be helpful. No.

Unknown Speaker 2:05:43
Okay, and is that something we could just email you, Brian? Yeah, just just

Unknown Speaker 2:05:49
Okay. Raise your hand up? or No? No. Okay. All right.

Unknown Speaker 2:05:55
Take a look away. And then I go back and try to make sure I’m catching everybody. That’s the other reason why we’re in a person. I had on a swivel here. All right. Well, we’ll go ahead and close that item of business AE, and plan on addressing it at next month’s meeting, most likely. Alright, so then we’re down to comments from HBC commissioners. Are there any commissioners that would like to make a comment about anything in particular? I don’t see anyone.

Unknown Speaker 2:06:34
I just wanted to really apologize to everyone for missing last month, it was a heck of a day and so sincere apologies to everybody for not coming towards.

Unknown Speaker 2:06:47
Life happens.

Unknown Speaker 2:06:50
I have

Unknown Speaker 2:06:51
one comment, and it was just kind of been trolling around in my mind here since the, the this Latin item. And I wondered, you know, we’re, we’re all we had some discussions about, we’re all kind of working in this little vacuum, right, and we have this rule, in case anybody hasn’t figured it out yet. We’ve got this collective kind of hot button about, you know, this barn being there. And I don’t know if there’s an opportunity for, for Brian or for Glenn, to, to find out what the temperature is in other parts of the city about this? I mean, for example, parks, I mean, is, is parks going to, you know, is there an opportunity to say, well, you know, potentially, could we take some of that money that they’re having to put in that the $140,000 and, and, you know, split the difference and have some go to parks and some go to preservation would the city in any way be willing to take over preservation or maintenance of just a structure that’s there, I think back to I don’t know what how it works. And it’s, it’s not quite as iconic, but you know, there’s that barn at the base of steamboat that’s an every, you know, poster from the, you know, from the 60s on, and that thing doesn’t do anything, it’s just a barn, it’s sitting there. But I guarantee that anybody who’s ever proposed that thing going is met with a, with a just a blast of public opposition. Again, I’m not comparing the two, per se, but I am, but that’s an example of a structure that just is there because, you know, everybody got used to it, and it became kind of this little iconic structure, so it can’t happen. So I just be curious to know, cuz I’m sure those folks are going back and grumbling about what we’re what we’re asking them to do, you know, is there support outside of this little group to try to make this happen? And if that’s something you could find out, I think we’d really appreciate it.

Unknown Speaker 2:08:56
We can have a certainly a more in depth conversation with them and see if what possibilities there are that we could bring to help that happen.

Unknown Speaker 2:09:07
Appreciate that. That’s my only comment. Um, okay. Next is comments from city council representative but I don’t believe we have Aaron on the on the meeting. And so that leads us to adjournment.

Unknown Speaker 2:09:30
I will move that we adjourn.

Unknown Speaker 2:09:33
Motion from Oregon seconded by Commissioner Hardy’s to adjourn. All in favor, say aye. Aye formalities and this one again. Thank you. Thank you all thank you to staff appreciate your time and efforts here. Everyone ever good night

Transcribed by https://otter.ai